Gay Marriage | New York | News

Watch: Greg Ball Explains Why He Voted Against Marriage Equality

Ball, who was considered a swing vote this week, ended up voting "no" last night. The State Senator explained the reasons for his decision to Anderson Cooper. Watch, AFTER THE JUMP.

Feed This post's comment feed


  1. I've never quite understood why religious rights trump all other rights. It's always been the great discriminator and is completely divisive; it separates more than brings together.

    Posted by: woodroad34d | Jun 25, 2011 10:25:41 AM

  2. Maybe I should care why Senator Ball chose to vote on the wrong side of history on what he must of known would pass even without his voice, but frankly . . . I don't care. I am sure he knew the bill was going to pass, and all he cared about was making sure the language on religious organizations were protected . . . he never intended to vote in favor of marriage equality. So, as one by one over the next ten years marriage equality is established across the country he will be both remembered as the senator who could have been the deciding vote, around whom everything solidified, and forgotten as that senator who missed the chance to make a difference in this country that, from its inception, never gave a damn about justice and equality for all men, and has travailed from that time to live up to its own national principles.

    Posted by: Ricco | Jun 25, 2011 10:30:46 AM

  3. As someone who attended parochial school as a youngster and attended mass 6 times a week, I grew up a fine upstanding Gay man, with no desire to be straight.
    Amen, or should it be Ah-Men.

    Posted by: Rob West | Jun 25, 2011 10:32:16 AM

  4. I think we should work for New York to have one less Ball.

    Posted by: Steve | Jun 25, 2011 10:44:04 AM

  5. all he will be is on the wrong side of history and did everything to stall this moment. did he forget separation of church and state? he was sworn into upholding the rights of the citizens of new york not the church. he will be remembered at election time.

    Posted by: walter | Jun 25, 2011 10:44:27 AM

  6. so, what he is saying is that if an 'individual' not involved with a religious organization but ONLY as a member should have the right to discriminate.

    with this way of thinking, if i have a personal objection to someone of, say, Japanese descent and i was brought up to believe that all Japanese are immoral and not to be trusted because of what happened in WWII it's okay for me to discriminate against them buy not letting them rent my apartment because they are not married in the "traditional" Christian way but by Shinto?

    i have no problem with churches being left off the hook and not having to marry certain couples; they actually do it all the time; besides, who would want to be married by a bigot anyway; it's supposed to be a happy day...

    Posted by: mike/ | Jun 25, 2011 10:45:00 AM

  7. Separation of church and state! That simple! The waters have become so muddied with religion in government.

    Posted by: Piper | Jun 25, 2011 10:52:28 AM

  8. Ball didn't have any.

    Posted by: Pugzz | Jun 25, 2011 11:01:05 AM

  9. In ten years time, nobody will remember Greg Ball. He'll be Mr Nobody. In contrast, all the other senators will be remembered, including Ball's party colleagues in Seland and Grisanti.

    Remember, folks, to write your letters or emails thanking the good senators who voted for our equality. Include the Republicans who helped make it happen - they would have been under immense pressure to vote no to gay marriage but resisted bravely.

    Posted by: adam | Jun 25, 2011 11:01:27 AM

  10. He makes a point of mentioning that there are people that he represents who are mad at him for not simply saying "no". Do the people who wanted him to simply say "yes" not matter to him? No mention of them (and boo to Anderson for not asking him about that).

    Posted by: Dastius Krazitauc | Jun 25, 2011 11:27:45 AM

  11. I didn’t even bother to hear what this opportunistic tool had to say. But I would definitely like to tell that smug S.O.B. that he can blow me.

    Posted by: ichabod | Jun 25, 2011 11:33:38 AM

  12. Time for NY to castrate one Ball!

    Posted by: Mark | Jun 25, 2011 11:36:23 AM


    Posted by: KURT QUINTON | Jun 25, 2011 11:39:12 AM

  14. Well... excuse me, but this is all nonsensical. All this crap about the rights of religion... The problem is these nutballs want Carte Blanche to trample on the rights of others. What makes their rights more important? We're suppose to have separation of church and state! WTF?

    Posted by: Mike | Jun 25, 2011 11:41:24 AM

  15. The NY bill went further than any of the five states that already have marriage equality. What if there had been a clause inserted in the bill giving gays the right to discriminate against religious cults, their affiliates and other individuals whose beliefs would be in conflict with ours. Isn't this also a freedom of speech issue?

    I'm sick of these mealy mouthed politicians kissing these religious bigots' asses at every provocation. Why should anyone be above the law in a country that's supposed to have separation of church and state? These same religious nutjobs are always playing the victim. I hope we're allowed to bad mouth them, denigrate, villify and dehumanize them with impunity as they do us 365 days of the year. Let them get a taste of their own hateful rhetoric to level the field.

    Posted by: Robert | Jun 25, 2011 11:47:44 AM

  16. Bad enough we have to hear the hate language of "gay marriage", now we have to hear about religious "protections". Why and how do you "protect" religions from marriage? Is everyone going to parrot this "protection" nonsense, just as they parrot the nonsense words "gay marriage"?

    Posted by: ohplease | Jun 25, 2011 11:50:17 AM

  17. I just couldnt bring myself to listen to his tripe, I think I might've thrown my computer out the window.

    But any talk of "religious protections" is absolute b.s. If a Jew wants to marry a non-Jew, an orthodox synagogue is well within its legal rights to turn them away. Period. End of story.

    This asshat just didnt want to have to stand up to any criticism come election time. I say we reach out to the gay community in Putnam County and get them mobilized to vote against Ball.

    Also, I would encourage you to call or email the Putnam County Visitors Bureau (its located in the picturesque Hudson Valley) and let them know you won't be visiting or planning your wedding there.

    Posted by: dizzy spins | Jun 25, 2011 11:55:20 AM

  18. What's the proper role of residents of other states? I see an idiot like this and want to give $ to his opponent. I guess it would offset the money being poured in by churches and conservative groups. It just seems like the people of Ball's district should make the decision and the district shouldn't become an arena for outside interests.

    Having said that, is there a site for finding out about and de-electing those who think they're in the NY Senate to represent a church?

    Posted by: Russell | Jun 25, 2011 12:01:51 PM

  19. Boy, is he lousy at speaking out of both sides of his mouth. Almost as lousy as AC continuously letting him off the hook for not answering the questions he posed.

    Posted by: Marc C | Jun 25, 2011 12:07:27 PM

  20. Senator Noballs here had really no intention of voting for it and is just another media whore.

    Posted by: chrissypoo | Jun 25, 2011 12:13:44 PM

  21. The guy is a good politician. The important thing is the bill was passed and the bigots lost.

    Posted by: jaragon | Jun 25, 2011 12:18:38 PM

  22. The Senator who dropped the Ball!

    Posted by: the_woodrow | Jun 25, 2011 12:35:20 PM

  23. Bad, bigoted Ball! Can you you say disingenuous? As a special treat to myself this morning,I elected not to watch this video. Hope you NYers are planning on mobilizing & getting this lilylivered no-friend-of-ours out of office. Maybe he can go & work for the Catholics or something.

    Posted by: leroy Laflamme | Jun 25, 2011 12:51:47 PM

  24. I'm not catholic. so the church and it's laws don't apply to me. i'm not pentecostal. i'm not this, that, or any other religion. leave me alone. preach to your flock and realize this state, this country, is not made up of people that are all of your religion. you can tell your parishoners to do this or that, but leave the state out of it. damn, you wanna be tax free and stuff, and want policy your way at the same time. i don't seek priests for political advice, and i sure as hell don't elect officials based on their religious affiliations. separation of church and state is where it's at, yo. what happened to that concept?

    Posted by: kodiak | Jun 25, 2011 1:01:56 PM

  25. Uganda is working on the ultimate in religious protectionism: kill the gays.

    Posted by: kodiak | Jun 25, 2011 1:08:00 PM

  26. 1 2 »

Post a comment


« «Towleroad Interview: Jared Max« «